The Saeima commission rejects all opposition proposals for increasing family allowances /

by times news cr

Several proposals for amendments to the Law on State⁢ Social ‍Benefits were submitted ⁣by members ⁢of the opposition National Union (NA) Uģis Mitrēvics and Jurģis Klotiņš, ⁢and “Latvija ⁤First” (Latvija​ First) ⁣politician Ilze Stobova.

A spokeswoman for the⁤ Ministry of Welfare (MoW) said that‍ the ⁤proposals would require significant budget funds that are not currently planned.

The Ministry objected to⁤ Klotiņa’s initiative, which provided ⁢for families‌ in which one or both parents are persons with⁣ the first or second group of ‍disabilities to be given a supplement⁢ of 50 euros per month to the family state allowance for each ‍child who has​ not reached the age of 18. The person raising a child would be entitled ‍to this allowance from the ‌day the parent⁣ is diagnosed with a ⁢disability⁢ until the day the parent’s disability is ⁤removed or the day the child reaches 18 ‌years of​ age

According to LM, the proposal is not logical, because there are ⁣two ⁤other types‍ of support for persons​ with disabilities, and ‍they should​ not be mixed. ​In the opinion of the ministry, premiums are not the right solution.

Also, ⁤Klotiņš proposed giving a 50-euro⁢ bonus to single-parent families ​for each child whose paternity has not been determined.

LM also did not support Mitrevic’s proposal, which provided ⁤for⁤ each parent to‍ receive one of‌ the benefits. In the opinion of the Ministry, the benefits would thus lose their purpose.

The head of the commission, Jānis Reirs (JV), said that the proposals presented by the ⁢opposition “in no way” contribute to‍ the solution of⁣ demographic problems,⁣ they improve the financial‌ situation of existing parents.

NA MP Artūrs Butāns opposed this, stating that such​ incentives promote birth, and this is proven by several studies, not just political opinions. According to the opposition politician, benefits are used to decide whether families are able or not to give birth to children.

Reir emphasized that the 50 euro allowance would⁤ not​ improve the⁣ demographic situation, ⁣calling for⁣ a “deeper ‍study” of ‍disadvantaged families, claiming that there are families where the child “does​ not ​have a name, but the amount of the‍ allowance”.

What impact ⁢could the‍ proposed​ amendments to the‌ Law ⁣on State Social Benefits have on families with disabilities in Latvia?

Interview: ⁢The Future of State Social​ Benefits in Latvia

Interviewer (Time.news ​Editor): ⁢ Welcome, everyone. Today, we have the privilege​ of speaking with Dr. ‌Eva Jātniece, a social policy expert, to discuss recent ⁣amendments‍ proposed​ to the Law on State Social Benefits. Thank you for joining us, ​Dr. Jātniece.

Dr. Eva Jātniece: ⁣ Thank you​ for having me. It’s a crucial topic, and I’m excited⁣ to share insights.

Editor: Let’s ⁢dive right in. Recently, members from the opposition National Union and ‘Latvija First’‌ proposed⁤ several amendments to ⁢the ⁣Law on State Social Benefits.​ Could⁤ you⁢ provide⁤ perspective on what these proposals entail and their significance?

Dr. Jātniece: Certainly! The proposals aim to enhance financial support for families⁣ with parents who ⁢have⁣ disabilities. Specifically, one proposal⁤ would introduce ​a supplement ​of 50 ⁣euros ⁤per month for each child in ⁣such families until they reach 18. This would provide essential⁢ financial⁤ relief,‌ especially considering‌ the ‍additional challenges these families often face.

Editor: That sounds​ promising. However, the Ministry ⁣of⁣ Welfare has‍ expressed concerns about the budgetary implications and logical consistency ​of these proposals. What are your thoughts on their objections?

Dr. ⁤Jātniece: The ministry’s concerns are valid on the⁤ surface. They point out that there​ are‌ existing​ support systems⁤ for persons with disabilities, so their argument revolves around not duplicating efforts. However, the need for targeted financial support​ for families in unique circumstances ⁤shouldn’t be⁤ overlooked. The cost of living ‍and the demands‍ of raising a ⁣child, especially⁣ with a parent who has a disability, can‌ be​ overwhelming.

Editor: It’s definitely a​ nuanced issue. Are there ⁣examples from other countries that successfully ‌integrate financial supplements for families dealing ‍with disabilities?

Dr.‌ Jātniece: Absolutely! For instance, Scandinavian countries typically have comprehensive⁤ support systems ​for families in these situations. They combine financial ‌aid ⁣with ‍robust social services that⁣ address the wider challenges these families⁤ face. ⁣By investing in ⁤such ⁣support, they not​ only ease ⁢the immediate financial burden but also promote long-term ​societal⁣ benefits.

Editor: Given the ministry’s stance on maintaining ‌distinctions between forms of assistance,‍ what approach do you think could‍ lead to a⁢ more effective resolution?

Dr.​ Jātniece: An integrated approach seems critical ⁣here. Instead⁣ of seeing⁢ supports in​ isolation, policymakers should consider how ‍they ⁢can work together to​ provide holistic support ⁣to families.‌ This⁤ could involve establishing a dedicated task force that includes‍ representatives from families, experts, and ⁤the government to analyze the overlapping needs and design a cohesive‌ framework of assistance.

Editor: That’s a ‍constructive solution. Lastly, what message would you like to⁣ convey to policymakers as they navigate these discussions?

Dr. ‌Jātniece: I would urge them to prioritize the voices of families affected by disabilities. Engaging those ⁣directly impacted by these policies ​can lead to better outcomes.⁣ Financial assistance is important, but so ⁣is social inclusion and accessibility. Policies‌ should reflect a comprehensive⁢ understanding of these families’ realities.

Editor: Thank you, ​Dr. ‌Jātniece, for shedding light on⁣ this ⁣critical issue. Your insights provide ⁣a clearer picture of the challenges and‍ potential ‌solutions. We hope to see constructive dialogue continue around these proposals.

Dr. Eva Jātniece: ​ Thank you ⁢for having me. It’s vital that we⁢ keep⁣ this conversation alive and push for ​policies that genuinely support our communities.

Editor: And thank you to our viewers for tuning in. Stay‌ informed ⁤with⁣ Time.news⁤ for more discussions on relevant topics ⁢affecting our ‍society.

You may also like

Leave a Comment